lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2020 10:44:35 +0200 From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "nstange@...e.de" <nstange@...e.de>, "ap420073@...il.com" <ap420073@...il.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [CRAZY-RFF] debugfs: track open files and release on remove On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 08:34 +0000, David Laight wrote: > > > I think adding the .owner everywhere would be good, and perhaps we can > > somehow put a check somewhere like > > > > WARN_ON(is_module_address((unsigned long)fops) && !fops->owner); > > > > to prevent the issue in the future? > > Does it ever make any sense to set .owner to anything other than > THIS_MODULE? No. But I believe THIS_MODULE is NULL for built-in code, so we can't just WARN_ON(!fops->owner). > If not the code that saves the 'struct file_operations' address > ought to be able to save the associated module. No, it's const. > I was also wondering if this affects normal opens? > They should hold a reference on the module to stop it being unloaded. > Does that rely on .owner being set? Yes. > For debugfs surely it is possible to determine and save THIS_MODULE > when he nodes are registers and do a try_module_get() in the open? I don't really see where to save it? johannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists